Related
Seriously, how can they call this an 8MP camera?
No matter what menu settings, location, lighting I choose MOST of the pics always come out looking like garbage. Really fuzzy.
No wonder Droid X and iPhone's camera destroyed this in the tests.
And the camcorder is another good joke from HTC. 720p video recording? Really? Total joke.
What kind of magical settings do you people use to make it look better?
Maybe I will hire a professional photographer/lighting specialist to follow me all over 24/7 just in case I need to take some decent pics with this damn thing.
End rant./
not gonna lie it kinda does suck on video and on normal shots you have to be still for a couple of seconds and it looks really nice
I like pics i take with it
magicalan said:
not gonna lie it kinda does suck on video and on normal shots you have to be still for a couple of seconds and it looks really nice
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's the software that comes with it I've tried other camera software like camera pro it snaps fast like really fast. Just that the software needs to be updated for the HTC EVO. Far as stock camera video its the software encoding sucks. The hardware is great just finding the right software or somebody develops one. Seems as if all the devs are busy rooting and tweaking the roms that HTC and Google should of done before even releasing software. Then maybe the devs can focus on making apps for us. Maybe somebody will soon develop better camera and video app that really take advantage of this great camera.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
AvatarOfFrost said:
Seriously, how can they call this an 8MP camera?
No matter what menu settings, location, lighting I choose MOST of the pics always come out looking like garbage. Really fuzzy.
No wonder Droid X and iPhone's camera destroyed this in the tests.
And the camcorder is another good joke from HTC. 720p video recording? Really? Total joke.
What kind of magical settings do you people use to make it look better?
Maybe I will hire a professional photographer/lighting specialist to follow me all over 24/7 just in case I need to take some decent pics with this damn thing.
End rant./
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you focusing the camera? Press and hold on the screen in the area you want to focus and it will focus and snap the picture. The pictures are pretty good (not DSLR quality or anything, but much better than most/all phones).
AvatarOfFrost said:
Seriously, how can they call this an 8MP camera?
No matter what menu settings, location, lighting I choose MOST of the pics always come out looking like garbage. Really fuzzy.
No wonder Droid X and iPhone's camera destroyed this in the tests.
And the camcorder is another good joke from HTC. 720p video recording? Really? Total joke.
What kind of magical settings do you people use to make it look better?
Maybe I will hire a professional photographer/lighting specialist to follow me all over 24/7 just in case I need to take some decent pics with this damn thing.
End rant./
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, two things to point out here
1. The Droid X and iPhone did not destroy the Evo in terms of camera. Camcorder wise yes, but not the camera itself. That's working just fine, and I haven't heard too many complaints about the camera itself. Most cell phone cameras at this level produce similar results.
2. Yes, the video quality does suck ass, but its been made a whole lot better here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=711808. My evo is recording at 13 mbps in h.264, and the results are fantastic. We shouldn't have to be doing this, but at least its working.
It's a phone.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Agreed. The camera sucks.. I think it's 8 in dog megapixels.
Ahh, ignorance is bliss!
Megapixels =/= photo quality directly. Mega pixel = 1 million pixels. 8 MP = 8 million pixels. There is much more than just "MP" when comparing cameras silly..
Go get educated, then come back
amirborna said:
Ahh, ignorance is bliss!
Megapixels =/= photo quality directly. Mega pixel = 1 million pixels. 8 MP = 8 million pixels. There is much more than just "MP" when comparing cameras silly..
Go get educated, then come back
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very true. Tons of megapixels really only help when you want to get huge prints. The two most important parts of a camera in my opinion are the image sensor and the lens, neither of which are going to be that great on any phone camera. I think the pictures the Evo takes are pretty good for a phone.
The evo camera isn't amazing... but if you need quality pictures, DON'T RELY ON YOUR PHONE. It's a ****ing phone! Get yourself a point and shoot or a DSLR.
Guys guys think about it phone cameras has came a long way from back in the early days. Soon these cameras will take the place of point and shoot. If you want better get DSLR. I have seen some great
Photos around the forum. The camera in this EVO are capable of taking great photos plus EVO has the processor to handle it more than what a point and shoot has. Soon cell phones will be getting dual cores. But until then it is this whack stock software that is processing the photos. Take the iPhone 5mp camera making the EVO picture look bad because they have a great camera software. Only if somebody can write a better camera app if I could code that would of been the first app I would of made. That and a better video conferencing app.
Sent from my PC36100 using
Tapatalk
Mecha2142 said:
Ok, two things to point out here
1. The Droid X and iPhone did not destroy the Evo in terms of camera. Camcorder wise yes, but not the camera itself. That's working just fine, and I haven't heard too many complaints about the camera itself. Most cell phone cameras at this level produce similar results.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As someone who has owned and used both the iPhone 4 and the Evo (returned my iP4 for the Evo), I can confidently say that the iP4's camera does indeed destroy the one on the Evo. I love my Evo and wouldn't switch back if you paid me, but the cameras aren't even in the same league.
The Evo takes photos which are on-par with the smartphones we've all seen and used over the last few years. They're okay. You can put the pics up on your website, etc., but I wouldn't rely on the Evo for anything particularly important. The iP4's camera, on the other hand, is just amazing. It can hold its own against any of the typical $200 - $300 non-DSLR cameras on the market and, therefore, can effectively be your everyday, walking around camera.
The best summary I can give is that the Evo's camera is a good to okay camera -- for a cell phone. The iP4's camera is a very good camera -- period.
AvatarOfFrost said:
Seriously, how can they call this an 8MP camera?
No matter what menu settings, location, lighting I choose MOST of the pics always come out looking like garbage. Really fuzzy.
No wonder Droid X and iPhone's camera destroyed this in the tests.
And the camcorder is another good joke from HTC. 720p video recording? Really? Total joke.
What kind of magical settings do you people use to make it look better?
Maybe I will hire a professional photographer/lighting specialist to follow me all over 24/7 just in case I need to take some decent pics with this damn thing.
End rant./
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you judging the fuzzy picture at first glance? By that I mean preview after your shot or in gallery? Because sometimes the picture if you don't zoom in it can look really fuzzy and then when you zoom in a title bit it corrects the picture quality and be very clear. Also download them to your pc and see how they actually turn out. You might be surprised. I am an avid amateur photographer so I use DSLR to shoot pictures. In good light the camera and software combo isn't bad. It has horrible low light capability but then again its a phone camera. And as many people said a few tweak here and there with the software and it will make a big difference. I know when they tweaked the HTC HD2 phone I had it made a world of difference. I know it will happen on this phone too. We have to let some get past the linpacks and quadrant scores for a little while before cameras become the hot topic
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
the pictures aren't the greatest but i have gotten some really good ones. I attached a few. People need to quit complaining though, it's a damn phone and the quality isn't half bad, if we can make it better then so be it but it's good as it is. These are from when i took my lil sisters to the zoo we were at the butterfly garden. I didn't edit these at all and they look even better on my phone
Its inferior to other devices so actually we should complain. Sure you can get nice shots but its anything but automatic.
I don't think it's that bad. Took this picture a month ago.
I agree on both sides here...the camera is pretty decent, but I do believe software improvements can and should be made.
Hasn't it been posted here that the camera manufacturer is the same as the ip4's?
AvatarOfFrost said:
Seriously, how can they call this an 8MP camera?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really have to pick on this.
They can call it an 8MP camera because it IS an 8MP sensor that produces a photograph that contains 8 million pixels.
Cicatrize said:
I really have to pick on this.
They can call it an 8MP camera because it IS an 8MP sensor that produces a photograph that contains 8 million pixels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. I would have to say that's one of the reasons for the "megapixels aren't everything" argument. It's just a description of how many pixels the sensor can produce like you said.
If you have a bigger sensor (which is difficult in a cellphone camera obviously) like in a DSLR, you get bigger pixels. I freakin' love my new Canon Rebel T2i I just bought last week!
These 2 pixs are of my daughter I am posting to show how good the basic camera in the Vibrant is. These were my 1st try at this. I used a prism and Held in front at a distance to make the effect (free hand holding, that is why not perfectly clear).
Kinda cool ... this little camera ... is quite good
oka1 said:
These 2 pixs are of my daughter I am posting to show how good the basic camera in the Vibrant is. These were my 1st try at this. I used a prism and Held in front at a distance to make the effect (free hand holding, that is why not perfectly clear).
Kinda cool ... this little camera ... is quite good
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should get a GOOD camera and compare the difference. You probably won't say the same thing after that.
Canon g11, Canon s90, or something equivalent (not all cameras are created equal)
^ Why would a $350-500 ACTUAL camera be a good comparison?
Those are cool shots man. I took some pics while in Alaska that blew me away at how good they look, even on a large pc screen. Very impressed with the camera as well.
Tarzanman said:
You should get a GOOD camera and compare the difference. You probably won't say the same thing after that.
Canon g11, Canon s90, or something equivalent (not all cameras are created equal)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What is your point? The SGS takes great pictures. Of course the S90 and G11 may take better pictures in certain situations, but the point of a camera phone is its always with you.
I went to a car show last weekend and brought my SGS and a Canon SD780IS. I ended up using my SGS the majority of the time because the pictures were amazing given everything was outdoors.
Have cameras
Since I do have a Canon G 11, Nikon D200 and D90 and I have to use all for my work They are all great cameras. The G11 is the best point and shoot out there) The comparison is not to compare cameras that have a 2.8 lens (1"+ aperture opening size) to one that is 1/16" lens, that is an incorrect comparison. The correct comparison is comparing to the other phone camera out there and this one is pretty easy and pretty decent compared to the 1/2 dozen I have had in the past.
WTf do you guys want me to tell you? All of you are harping and going on about a cell phone whose photos are not as good as digital cameras that cost the same amount
^ Why would a $350-500 ACTUAL camera be a good comparison?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Uh, because that is what a Vibrant costs?
Maybe you guys think that diffraction-limited, low dynamic range, under-saturated photos are great... but the only time I pull out any cell phone to take a picture is when I don't have a real camera with me.
They aren't horribly bad photos, but they aren't anything to write home about. You could get photos of the same quality from a $90 el cheapo digital camera.
If you make a post saying "hey, look how awesome these photos are", and the photos aren't awesome... then maybe its stupid of you get angry, eh?
Are you serious man?
Here I was thinking we were on a forum for phones.....
The effect
The point was showing the effect with a phone cam is possible and was kinda kewl not a rhetorical argument about the photos per-se I guess I should have mentioned I modified the camera app software as well, but I figured most of the ppl here would have already guessed that.
Tarzanman said:
WTf do you guys want me to tell you? All of you are harping and going on about a cell phone whose photos are not as good as digital cameras that cost the same amount
Uh, because that is what a Vibrant costs?
Maybe you guys think that diffraction-limited, low dynamic range, under-saturated photos are great... but the only time I pull out any cell phone to take a picture is when I don't have a real camera with me.
They aren't horribly bad photos, but they aren't anything to write home about. You could get photos of the same quality from a $90 el cheapo digital camera.
If you make a post saying "hey, look how awesome these photos are", and the photos aren't awesome... then maybe its stupid of you get angry, eh?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so you want to compare a $500 device that is practically a portable computer with a 5MP camera attached to it to a $500 device which is a PROFESSIONAL CAMERA with probably 12+MP.
Yeah thats a comparison. shut up.
The point the author and the rest of us are trying to make is that the pictures are amazing for what it is.
My girlfriend has a motorola RIZR Z3 with a piece of crap 1.3MP camera. she takes lots of pictures with it and sends them to me, and ya know what, they look pretty good coming from that piece of crap camera.
But when she sees the pictures i take with my nexus she's amazed that they came from a phone. Now do they look as good as the pictures from my olympus or nikon? hell no, but they sure as hell look damn good when you say they came from a phone.
And not everyone likes to carry around a big DSLR everywhere they go too. Hell i went up to Washington DC for a week long vacation and i didn't bring that thing along because of how bulky it is.
The man wanted to show pictures that in his opinion looked pretty good considering it was a cellphone. Im pretty sure we all know that for a fact cameras are only designed for quality pictures..and the only point you people are proving is how none of you care to show the world that you all waste your time with pointless arguments
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
I agree with you neok44.... +1
Being realistic....a phone camera is just that, a phone camera.
Maybe in 5 more years they will take good pictures, but for now, not a single one is worth it to use as anything more than just a "it's all I had with me at the time" type camera.
My 10 year old Sony F550V blows my Vibrant out of the water in pic quality. Of course it has a real Zeiss lense....but hey
I'm brand new here but felt that I had to comment as some here seem to be close to hari kiri (sic) over some reviews.
I do feel that the screen will be a little low on colour saturation but it's by no means terrible - and the adjustment options included in the final software should fix this. But what I really want to talk about is the camera.
Phonearena have been especially vocal about how the camera doesn't match up to the competition but I'm absolutely amazed that they've missed a glaring error in their analysis! Because of the boost in mp's and the different focal lengths of each phone, when they're doing a 100% crop comparison, they're clearly zooming in much, much further on the XZ. I don't think it's intentional but if you look at the crops they give, the difference is clear. The XZ i
Now I'm not saying that Sony haven't been a little heavy handed in their compression - they have. BUT if you zoom in comparison shots to the SAME CROP the difference is far less pronounced than some would have you believe. Indeed, if you zoomed in the other shots to the same depth as the XZ zoom they would become a mess of pixels - better defined pixels, sure, but no more usable for it.
Is the camera on the XZ blowing me away? I dunno, I'll put it to the test when I get it. But don't write it off based on comparissons with other phones unless you do the tests yourselves because phonearena have done a half-assed job, frankly.
Your thoughts below, please.
Great observation. I do see the compression as a necessary, temporary downside to putting a 13mp camera on a smartphone. They're probably working on keeping the responsiveness up first; hopefully the compression will get better through software updates.
That Phonearena review was biased.... i tell u why....:
1. They ranked devices on every domain and listed lumia 920 and XZ with least ranking however ... where these two stood out to be better than others ... they skipped raking quite cleverly.
2. They even ranked Lumia 920 and XZ in night mode as bad shooters LOL at them... everybody knows the truth.
3. They even placed 1-2 cheeky discouraging lines in low light mode review about XZ.
4. In Detail they ranked XZ last. that was a big fail even their own pics that were taken... small boards really far away were much readable on XZ than others.
5. They always used superior auto mode in XZ but used manual settings in others..... obviously XZ will be confused in special conditions like a well lit building at night and surrounding trees which are not much in light... use manual settings there and i m sure XZ will tear others apart.
nikhiltanwar said:
That Phonearena review was biased.... i tell u why....:
1. They ranked devices on every domain and listed lumia 920 and XZ with least ranking however ... where these two stood out to be better than others ... they skipped raking quite cleverly.
2. They even ranked Lumia 920 and XZ in night mode as bad shooters LOL at them... everybody knows the truth.
3. They even placed 1-2 cheeky discouraging lines in low light mode review about XZ.
4. In Detail they ranked XZ last. that was a big fail even their own pics that were taken... small boards really far away were much readable on XZ than others.
5. They always used superior auto mode in XZ but used manual settings in others..... obviously XZ will be confused in special conditions like a well lit building at night and surrounding trees which are not much in light... use manual settings there and i m sure XZ will tear others apart.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure but I think they would get better results with superior auto. I think PA did not use superior auto.
I think we shoul wait for more precise reviews like the GSMarena one which is by far, one of the best out there.
But I won't be surprise if the XZ's camera won't match nowadays' best 8 MP standards, Sony has been trailing behind for quite some time now in the Photo department.
yeah that comparison doesn't make any sense both Samsungs where over exposed for most of the photos, big difference in iso use etc etc. clearly done by someone who doesn't know anything about photography
I don't take PA reviews very seriously - specially when it comes to cameras. Somehow they find samsung cameras pretty good which is very questionable - I think. I've owned all three samsung galaxy phones. GS1 camera was horrible, GS2 was average and GS3 is also average. HOX has a better camera, Xperia T is better than both.Xperia Z should be even better. And I don't take pictures with lousy auto mode.
PA reviews are usually good except for the camera part - they simply don't understand photography. If you read their comparison, you can just tell that it was written by a noob.
What i don't understand is the photos posted by someone here on Google+ definitely looks good.
check these out:
plus.google.com/
photos/110267829736715997848/
albums/5843542135386591041/5843542150197706866?banner=pwa
At first, I thought the photos above are not from XZ. They are really clear, sharp, and vibrant. I don't see noise in them.
They are miles better than what PA and other sites are posting. How could this happen? Different software or versions?
Humandroidz said:
What i don't understand is the photos posted by someone here on Google+ definitely looks good.
check these out:
plus.google.com/
photos/110267829736715997848/
albums/5843542135386591041/5843542150197706866?banner=pwa
At first, I thought the photos above are not from XZ. They are really clear, sharp, and vibrant. I don't see noise in them.
They are miles better than what PA and other sites are posting. How could this happen? Different software or versions?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have analysed these images... On a bigger screen ..with zoomed in depth... They look good surely... That is why PA have lost it....
---------- Post added at 10:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:46 PM ----------
Humandroidz said:
I'm not sure but I think they would get better results with superior auto. I think PA did not use superior auto.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They used superior auto... In some domains they even wrote it... Never used HDR .... I think superior auto was in most situations... So.many times this superior auto mode gets things wrong... It should be used when u r super noob in photography.... Not in a picture comparison
seen that review and i can say it is a total bias.
rufaz said:
seen that review and i can say it is a total bias.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a common opinion about Phonearena's reviews. Many reviews were considered biased, with results that nobody is able to replicate etc. I wouldn't pay much attention to it - no matter if it's positive or negative.
schecter7 said:
I don't take PA reviews very seriously - specially when it comes to cameras. Somehow they find samsung cameras pretty good which is very questionable - I think. I've owned all three samsung galaxy phones. GS1 camera was horrible, GS2 was average and GS3 is also average. HOX has a better camera, Xperia T is better than both.Xperia Z should be even better. And I don't take pictures with lousy auto mode.
PA reviews are usually good except for the camera part - they simply don't understand photography. If you read their comparison, you can just tell that it was written by a noob.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought I was the only one who shared this view seeing as last year I had the Xperia S & T, S3 & N2 and HOX and for starters I believe Iphone arena claimed the camera on the HOX and Xperia T were mediocre compared with S3 (N2 has same camera as S3 anyway). That was total B.S The camera on the T and HOX and even Xperia S were far better than the samsung cameras both outdoors and indoors and at night, especially indoors with lighting where the S3/N2 cameras became washed out and I tested the camera's vs eachother same angles etc and the samsung cameras were the worst.
I have also compared the camera on the lumia 920 vs s3/N2 in shops and the lumia 920 looks better.
Even looking at the images IPA have done with the Z the images look great.
Its hard to believe all those reviews... Who even knows whether they are giving us true/genuine pictures- its upto the eidtor/reviewer to give us genuine review. Not even their webmaster will know it whether they are genuine.. There were plenty of crtitcism from reader about engagdet's news articles of apple products once... Some times its very clear in the writing the bias towards non-apple news. Who knows they have been receiving goodies and bucks... I was in straight fire @ one ZNet writer after reading his apple article- he wrote like not even a hardcore apple fan wont writer against android phones- blindly.... They all in US... we donno the truth...
I donno much about phonearena... Also i'm not going to expect much from a tiny smartphone sensor whether its 13mp or 44mp... You have to understand the camera sensors first... As the sensor becomes small in size the light goes thru it also less , hence the picture qaulity... Still the best quality sensor gives best results... In smartphone case the photographer has to be very careful and still as much as the object to get nice photos... Image stabilization is there , but its nowhere near of DSLR or other proper cameras.... So each time you take a picture its different although same object , same angle or whatever you can imagine there.... Competition in smartphone arena is to make thinnest phone... as the phone goes thinner camera sensor goes smaller(thinner) too.. otherwise you will see a bump where camera sits (like in pureview).....
gd
I think HTC could have been a big contender to the galaxy S IV but will be dismissed by the average consumer because of the "poor" 4 ultrapixel camera, i dont get how a company struggling to sell would do such a thing , i love that they took a risk but maybe they should have waited until they had profits again, what do you think people is going to do when they go to buy a phone and see that the camera on the one is "just" 4 megapixels vs 13 megapixels on the galaxy S IV?
8 ultrapixels would have been great, also the daylight pictures are less than spectacular, the one x/xl takes better pictures at daylight ,lets see how turns out for HTC, i fear it wont be the best outcome :crying: , such a shame that "the best" will lose
So far seeing pictures taken against the iPhone 5, Galaxy S4, etc... I think they made the right choice. It takes some really nice pictures.
You are ignorant, HTC One along with Lumia taking the best photos in market at the moment. before coming up with a topic like that learn to check to results please.
But yeah, one thing is clear, people like you will think "hmm, 4 mp is bad i should get S4 because of that" and get S4. That is the only downside of the idea. Which I'm hoping wouldn't be a problem because noone is telling that it is 4 mp, they are marketting it as Ultrapixel Camera as a whole phrase, which is working relatively well.
You are right. While the tests seem to show, that the camera is really awesome and isn't worser than the 13 MP one the majority of people are still getting their phones direct from the store and deciding basically from the specs and the general appearance. I hope HTC will profit at least from their design and aluminium body this year.
Only ignorant consumers purchase items based on just numbers...
Education is key.
Many reviews show that its the second best on the market, after 808 and just beating the N95. Lesser pixels are also needed to process in the Zoe mode. So my conclusion will be it isn't a "poor" or "unnecessary" change. In fact, it's proving to be one of the best cameras (obviously if you don't print your photographs in full size)
Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2
Dharkan said:
You are ignorant, HTC One along with Lumia taking the best photos in market at the moment. before coming up with a topic like that learn to check to results please.
But yeah, one thing is clear, people like you will think "hmm, 4 mp is bad i should get S4 because of that" and get S4. That is the only downside of the idea. Which I'm hoping wouldn't be a problem because noone is telling that it is 4 mp, they are marketting it as Ultrapixel Camera as a whole phrase, which is working relatively well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That true no one has told me its a 4mp camera in shops, they say 4 ultra pixel.
Also when I played with the phone and compared pics to the xz and and s3 etc it blew them away which is one of the reasons there is a lovely silver HTC One sitting on my desk charging right now.
Also regarding charging, battery life for me so far is great: seeing as I had to send stuff to the phone yesterday it got charged to 61% before I took if off the usb at aprrox 1.30pm yesterday and started using it: screen 30% bright, power saver on, all connections off unless I need them, playing some music, generally looking at the phone, a bit of internet browsing, mostly phone calls and texts and the battery was on 6% at about 10 am this morning and I went to bed at 2am.
Btw the this is the same pattern i do for all phones I have 30% brightness and power saver. I will be able to properly judge when its actually charged to 100% though and compare it to my others phones bar the note 2 where it will clearly lose.
Actually there is still noise in the images on the 4MP sensor, but less than a 13MP for sure in low light.
HTC made a deliberate decision that a phone camera is more utilized to pictures of family, friends when you go out somewhere like a restaurant, bar etc. In those circumstances good low light performance is essential and you don't need (in fact you don't want) to see the highest resolution possible on people's faces etc
You only really need 13MP when you are shooting landscape. In the case of Sony, they try and incorporate a camera that is more aimed towards tourist pictures. During the daylight, the resolution advantage will be clear to see on detailed scenes.
Personally, I do not use my phone as a replacement for a good camera. I use it exactly as HTC considered, incidental photos when out with friends and to keep memories of those occasions.
Having said that, it is not the best 4MP sensor...it should really have been even better (less noise). So while I think HTC did play a gamble here, and to some extent, there is a good amount of logic behind their decision...the implementation is still not as good as I would have hoped. It is just possible that software updates will improve its performance further.
R89SONY said:
which is one of the reasons there is a lovely silver HTC One sitting on my desk charging right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Amen!
jonstatt said:
Actually there is still noise in the images on the 4MP sensor, but less than a 13MP for sure in low light.
HTC made a deliberate decision that a phone camera is more utilized to pictures of family, friends when you go out somewhere like a restaurant, bar etc. In those circumstances good low light performance is essential and you don't need (in fact you don't want) to see the highest resolution possible on people's faces etc
You only really need 13MP when you are shooting landscape. In the case of Sony, they try and incorporate a camera that is more aimed towards tourist pictures. During the daylight, the resolution advantage will be clear to see on detailed scenes.
Personally, I do not use my phone as a replacement for a good camera. I use it exactly as HTC considered, incidental photos when out with friends and to keep memories of those occasions.
Having said that, it is not the best 4MP sensor...it should really have been even better (less noise). So while I think HTC did play a gamble here, and to some extent, there is a good amount of logic behind their decision...the implementation is still not as good as I would have hoped. It is just possible that software updates will improve its performance further.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The noise problem was with prerelease software, if you see the photos now, there's way much less noise
From USA Gizmodo:
Another pleasant surprise: the camera's UltraPixels actually live up to the hype. In our testing the One performed as well as if not better than the top smartphone shooters out there (check out our comparison). It also took better low-light (read: in bars) photos than any phone I've used, and I was extremely impressed by how accurate the color rendering was. Now, if you're planning on printing your photos on 8x10s, maybe you'll miss the extra megapixels, but who really does that with their phone cam? For the web, you won't be able to tell the difference in resolution, and you will be able to tell the difference in low-light.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check out the photo thread
NiCk.JaY said:
The noise problem was with prerelease software, if you see the photos now, there's way much less noise
Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have one...I still see some noise. I am not saying it is bad. Just I guess I had such high expectations that it would take super clean images.
jonstatt said:
I have one...I still see some noise. I am not saying it is bad. Just I guess I had such high expectations that it would take super clean images.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you updated it to the latest version? Because the pics from Gizmodo, Engadget, Verge are superb
SteelH said:
Only ignorant consumers purchase items based on just numbers...
Education is key.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. Also quality beats quantity!
Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2
NiCk.JaY said:
Have you updated it to the latest version? Because the pics from Gizmodo, Engadget, Verge are superb
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no update. I definitely have the most current release on the phone. I think it was just my expectations were too high. Don't get me wrong, it takes great pics.
I think that it will be very important for in-store signage of the HTC One show the comparison of the HTCs photo quality against "the others". They can't leave it to the uninformed general public or the uninformed sales staff to simply look at point form notes on the phone spec
AW: HTC risked itself unnecessarily with the 4 ultrapixels camera
And... Megapixels are nothing. It is all about the sensor and the lense. It is time to stop that Megapixel hype... Just look at the S4... 13mp on a damn small sensor, I guess you will not see a difference between my 1S and the S4...
Sent from my HTC One S using xda app-developers app
4mp should of NEVER been banded about because in work people were going 'Omg the HTC ONE only has a 4mp camera.... who would want that' and then you have to explain it to them etc....
It was a risk but it should of just been left at 'Ultrapixel' and not compared to a megapixel count.
x3
I personally as a Photographer like their decission.
Remember the Foveon X3 Chip. If HTC manages to get something more out of that technique, they will get much better results.
At first saw no difference with the quality from the x. Now after a few dozen photos. There is a difference.close up shots capture loads of detail
Sent from my HTC One using xda app-developers app
First of all, I think that HTC from the quality point of view made the right decision. The camera appears better than sufficient - for the ordinary smartphone user that is. HTC's approach is different, I think: Remember "Friend Stream" in Sense? Now it is "Blinkfeed". My impression is that HTC bets on that users will shoot more photos if the photos can be uploaded to FB and other social networks quicker and thus in bigger numbers thanks to their smaller size. Photos go up easier to the Dropbox storage, too. The camera with 4 megapixels only is really more usable.
In the end the photo quality debate is a "luxury issue", the "ordinary" customer will not see a quality issue in the images. But the fact that he/she can really easily share their photos shot with the One - which they in real life can't with photos from their Samsung and other phones due to the sheer size of the images - this must be communicated to the customer. In addition, 32 GB built in storage on the One due to the difference in size of the camera's images in real life equal 50 GB storage on the Samsung.
To my opinion, therefore the success of the HTC One is not so dependent on the question whether 13 megapixels are better than 4 (or vice versa), but on the question whether they succeed in explaining the potential of smaller image files to the masses. My serious concern is, that even HTC and their marketing people are not aware really, what HTC's development department had in mind.
I'm looking for switching from Lumia 920 to an Android phone with a good camera like the one in 920. I was close to getting a HTC One but I read horrible stories about purple fringing and so dropped that idea. Then I looked at HTC One X, but it seems to be an outdated phone and so dropped that plan too. All my friends have iPhone or Samsung and so I don't want to get them either.
Finally when I read the reviews for G2 it seemed to be the most perfect phone for me as it's said to have a nice camera, 5 inch display, Android and fast. On top of it AT&T has also promised an early free upgrade for G2. But when I read some of the threads here they talk about the camera being too slow and not good for indoor. I also read the thread about the Xdabbeb Mod and it seems promising but some folks in that same thread say that even after updating with that Mod the camera is still not that good.
So here I'm, so confused now knowing if I should get G2 or not. What's your opinion on G2's Camera? Again I'm looking for a decent camera that could take good pictures like my Lumia 920 whether indoor or outdoor. Any help is greatly appreciated.
(I'm sorry about the long post and for the wrong techy terms that I might have used here)
ratibars said:
I'm looking for switching from Lumia 920 to an Android phone with a good camera like the one in 920. I was close to getting a HTC One but I read horrible stories about purple fringing and so dropped that idea. Then I looked at HTC One X, but it seems to be an outdated phone and so dropped that plan too. All my friends have iPhone or Samsung and so I don't want to get them either.
Finally when I read the reviews for G2 it seemed to be the most perfect phone for me as it's said to have a nice camera, 5 inch display, Android and fast. On top of it AT&T has also promised an early free upgrade for G2. But when I read some of the threads here they talk about the camera being too slow and not good for indoor. I also read the thread about the Xdabbeb Mod and it seems promising but some folks in that same thread say that even after updating with that Mod the camera is still not that good.
So here I'm, so confused now knowing if I should get G2 or not. What's your opinion on G2's Camera? Again I'm looking for a decent camera that could take good pictures like my Lumia 920 whether indoor or outdoor. Any help is greatly appreciated.
(I'm sorry about the long post and for the wrong techy terms that I might have used here)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
G2 camera is excellent in my opinion. I never had a problem with it or had to install a modded camera on it. I didn't really use it but when I did the pictures were crisp & clear. I'm running AOSP now and the camera is still performing well. It all depends on what you want to use it for. The mods that you mentioned are great and if you ever have problems with the G2 camera flashing one of them will solve it. :victory:
It's exactly like what you've read. Shots with plenty of lighting are fantastic and stunning. Shots with lower lighting (as in indoors) are terrible with the stock camera--it takes way too long to take a shot after you hit the shutter button, as in 5 seconds sometimes. So if you have a moving target, you will miss the moment, or get a blurry mess.
Plus, the denoising algorithm is terrible. Detail on low light shots get lost and people's faces often look like a watercolor painting and unrealistic. Camera mods like xdabebb's help quite a bit, but still the camera has a lot to be desired.
Coming from the Lumia, you will be VERY disappointed.
beezar said:
Coming from the Lumia, you will be VERY disappointed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes he will, but compared to other android phones it is one of the best cameras available, for the next 2-3 months or so. there are some pretty saucy rumors about the s5 camera though.
I used to have an HTC One before picking up the LG G2 earlier this month and it had a great camera. Until it started malfunctioning with the purple/blue/pink tint issue. The low light performance was awesome and the audio recording was the best I've had on a phone due to the dual microphones that it had. I haven't really had a chance to test out the G2's camera much but it's been alright so far. Just disappointed in the low light and microphone performance. The G2 does capture a lot more details with more accurate colors in normal conditions because of the higher megapixel count though.
These are really the only pictures I took to compare the two cameras before I sent in my HTC One to my insurance company:
http://imgur.com/a/OJlTa
Here are some photos I took with my HTC One before the sensor went bad:
http://imgur.com/a/9lRiz
The camera in decent light and with still objects is great. Like others have said, it doesn't do too well in low light conditions or with moving objects. I would expect that with the speed in which the phone takes pictures, that it would do much better with moving objects but you do get a blurry mess. It's a fantastic phone in every other regard, however, the camera could use some improvement.
I love the G2's camera. If you don't think it takes good photos, just look at these. None of these are edited, and straight from the camera. Photobucket reduces the quality a bit as well.
Thanks everyone. So it looks like I can't get pictures as good as the ones I get in my 920 but it seems I can still get decent pictures. I think that should be enough for me. I'm not looking for digital camera quality pictures but just the ability to capture good moments and share it with others. As long as those pictures are not bad I should be ok with that (yes, I'm convincing myself! ).
geoff5093 said:
I love the G2's camera. If you don't think it takes good photos, just look at these. None of these are edited, and straight from the camera. Photobucket reduces the quality a bit as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those are nice pictures. Were they taken using a camera MOD?
ratibars said:
Thanks everyone. So it looks like I can't get pictures as good as the ones I get in my 920 but it seems I can still get decent pictures. I think that should be enough for me. I'm not looking for digital camera quality pictures but just the ability to capture good moments and share it with others. As long as those pictures are not bad I should be ok with that (yes, I'm convincing myself! ).
Those are nice pictures. Were they taken using a camera MOD?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A mix really, some with the stock LG camera, some using the AOSP camera, and some using the 1.5.0 camera mod.